(영문) 인천지방법원 2020.01.31 2018나72362

beta

본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.

Text

Reasons

텍스트 조절

글꼴

크기(pt)

굵기

줄 간격

자간(%)

(영문) 인천지방법원 2020.01.31 2018나72362

건물명도(인도)

Text

1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Defendant.

Purport of claim and appeal

1..

Reasons

1. The defendant's grounds for appeal citing the judgment of the court of first instance are the same purport as the argument in the court of first instance, and the fact-finding and judgment of the court of first instance are recognized as legitimate even if the evidence additionally submitted in the court of first instance was

The reasoning of this court is that the reasoning for the defendant's argument is stated in the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, except as stated in the following paragraph (2). Thus, this court shall accept it as it is by the main sentence of Article 420 of

2. A lease for additional judgment on the defendant's assertion (including a lease on a deposit basis) becomes effective when one of the parties agrees to allow the other party to use or benefit from the subject matter, and the other party agrees to pay rent for it.

The characteristic of the rent is that the rent requires the payment of rent for the use of the leased object and for the consideration of the profit.

Since a lease is a marry contract, it is established only if there is a certain agreement between a lessor and a lessee, and it is not necessarily required to make a written statement for the establishment of a lease contract.

The Defendant (F) continuously paid to F Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “F”) or the Plaintiff from around 2012. As such, the monthly rent of KRW 3700,000 was paid to F until July 2015, and the Plaintiff began to pay from August 2015.

As above, the time when the other party to the payment of rent changes from F to the Plaintiff, and around that time, the name of the supplier of electronic tax invoices was changed from F to the Plaintiff.

Therefore, it is reasonable to view that the Plaintiff succeeded to the status of the lessee of the instant building by concluding a contract to acquire business rights and equipment from F with the instant building by transferring the status of the lessee of the instant building.

On the other hand, from March 2016, the monthly rent of the instant sub-lease contract was increased by KRW 4,300,000.

참조조문

-민사소송법 제420조

유사 판례

-인천지방법원 2020.01.31 2018나72362

-대법원 1996. 3. 8. 선고 95다15087 판결

-인천지방법원 2018.11.29 2017가단251945

-서울남부지방법원 2021.04.16 2019가단273005

-서울중앙지방법원 2015.09.09 2013가단221327